The clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1883-1888, 1887-02-16


conveyance to Charles FL. Werner be
cancelled and the property subjected TO
compliments claim of alimony.
The chancellor found Tor the COM
plainant, awarded alimony to the
amount of $3.50 per annum, and ordered
that the property conveyed ny geo. Z
Werner to Charles 81. Werner be sub
jected to the payment OF the decree:
The defendants appealed. Inc facts OF
the case are sufficiently stated IN the
opinion of the court
COOPER, C. j., delivered the opinion OF
| the Court.
The conclusion at which we have
arrived on another point IN tins cause
makes it unnecessary to consider or TO
decide whether voluntary conveyance
of his estate made by the husband to
prevent his wife from subjecting 1t to
| the payment of a decree for alimony
| which he anticipated might be there
after rendered against him In threaten
ed suit. can be attacked and overthrow
as fraudulent by the wife. We leave
| this question open for decision when it
shall arise in case necessary for its
determination. We also deem it unne-
cessary to express any opinion upon the
question as 10 whether the conveyance
from til e husba and to his brother was
made by the husband to prevent 1t from
being subjected by the wife to the
decree for alimony. The complainant
case is fatally defective in that she has
wholly failed to show any collusion
between the grantor and the grantee in
the assailed conveyance, and has shown
no fact from which the court can infer
that the grantee had notice either of the
fraudulent intent with which the grantol
acted, or of facts which made it his duty
to investigate whether such intent really
existed. BY her bill the complainant
anticipated and negatived the defense
which she expected the grantee to inter
pose, viz: that he was bona fide pur-
chaser for value. By his answer which
is responsive to the allegations of the
bill. he replies that he purchased in good
faith the lands conveyed to him anc
paid full value therefor. In this condi
ton of the pleadings the burden wa,
deyolyed on the complainant of estab
fishing the allegations of her bill thus
responded to by the grantee. A careful
examination of the record fails to dis
close any single fact established against
the grantee from which either bad faitf
or non-payment of the purchase money
! can be inferred. The decree must there
fore be reversed in so far as it subject
the land conveyed to Charles Fl. Werner
to liability for the alimony awarded
against the other defendant.
/ We see no error in the decree as t.
George Werner, the husband. 1t is abun
dainty shown that he has put away tn,
complainant, and so far as the recorC
/ discloses, for no fault of hers. TIT
rumors affecting her chastity, which
were in circulation anterior to her mar
riage, seem to rest on no just suspicion
and she has by the only accessible evi
dence, that of her family and attendin!
physicians, proved them tc have beef
unfounded; that she has been the victim
of slanderous reports is undoubted, bu
that there was any occasion for them i
disproyed. Under such circumstance
the husband cannot sever the MARTA
ties and escape marital responsibilities
!, In view of the fact that the husband i
/, shown to have been the owner of al
, estate of the value of from 81 200 t.
81 900, and is also shown by the evi6 enc
f to be capable to earn more than sup
/ port by his own labor, we do not thinl
the alimony awarded, one hundred ant
r fifty dollars per annum, to be excessive
The decree as to George Z. Verne
, will be affirmed; as to Charles III. Verne
r it is revers ed and bill dismissed.